About your Search

20130101
20130131
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
this now? if it's motivating the opposition's base, it's fueling the n.r.a. with new funding, new membership, why do the democrats want to take this on? >> well, in part because they do want to actually see action, but what you saw with senator feinstein acknowledging what an uphill battle it is, you start to wonder, the administration's own push with some executive action, with a lot of things that they can do behind the scenes, they're doing this two-fold and congress is acting outside of what the administration wishes. so it's two real tracks and it's no accident the vice president is going to virginia tomorrow to ke ts sow o the road a little bit with a round table discussion, he's going to have different lawmakers there. this is the site -- the state where virginia tech happened, the school shooting there, very tragic, and he's trying to sort of capitalize on a lot of that energy the same way they're doing on newtown to motivate people to action. from a political perspective in congress democrats raised pacs, as well. gabrielle giffords aims to raise $20 million for the 2014
. i mean i think there is say chance here. i think the nra has stumbled badly. they boast an increase in membership. i think they are like the tea party. they misunderstand what is going on in the country, the change in mood in the country, especially after newtown. the tea party defeated richard luggar in indiana and was full of themselves and now instead of conservative republican holding that seat, like lugar it is a moderate democrat joe done oly holding that seat. i think the nra is very much in the same my op oik mind-set. and i think that shall did --. >> i think i disagree. i think they know what they are doing. they know what is happening but they are making sure gun owners think obama going to take away your guns. >> woodruff: thank you both. and mark and david keep up the talk on the "doubleheader," recorded in our newsroom. that will be posted at the top of the rundown later tonight. >> brown: finally, a word about tonight's edition of "need to know" on pbs. as the discussion goes on in washington about revising the federal tax code, "need to know" profiles four new jersey
, challenged lapierre on whether the n.r.a. supports limiting gun sales in any fashion. >> now, in your testimony in '99, you supported mandatory instant criminal background checks for every sale at every gun show. you said, quote, "no loopholes anywhere for anyone." now, today, of course, you said criminals would never submit to background checks. statistics show that many do. nearly two million convicted criminals and other dangerous people trying to buy a firearm since '94, as chief johnson said, were prevented. so let me ask you this: do you still, as you did in 1999, still support mandatory background checks at gun shows, yes or no? >> senator, i do not believe the way the law is working now, unfortunately, that it does any good to extend the law to private sales between bbsts and collectors. >> okay, so you do not support mandatory background checks in all instances at gun shows. >> we do not because the fact is the law right now is a failure the way it's working. the fact is that you have 76,000-some people that have been denied under the present law. only 44 were prosecuted. you
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)